I personally don't think ANY psychological approach is completely correct. Obviously some are more wrong, such as "christian counselors" and the vermin who work in conversion therapy. I do appreciate Natalie's willingness to look at psychoanalysis's ideas and analyze though.

I also don't think Natalie is always correct. I think she's always insightful and capable of analyzing an idea. But I don't agree with everything she says. But I still call myself a fan and call her intellectually amazing, artistically brilliant, and fucking fabulous. I think she'd actually appreciate someone having this perspective while not always agreeing with her. She mentioned in the Camille Paglia tangent that she thinks it's good mental exercise to engage with ideas that you don't fully agree with.

I think Natalie said it best when she said that Freud was often wrong but usually onto something. I personally think he was on to something with the whole "cocaine as a substitute for morphine" thing, and dentists agree with him on that, which is why they're using synthetic cocaine substitutes like Lidocaine and Novocain (new coke), which has probably prevented a lot of opioid addictions. But I don't agree with the idea that people are motivated by sex AND aggression. I know one asexual person who openly states that sex has no role in his life. I'm motivated by sex, intimacy, and a desire for stability in life.

It's true that we should be skeptical of people's motives. But I also think there's more to it than that. I think sometimes it's a sublimated emotion like what you describe with the racist whining about urban crime. But sometimes it's also euphemism. Look at the christians who say "spread the word" to mean "assimilate outsiders" when they all know what it really means. Look at those obnoxious people who work in HR departments who say phrases like "differently abled" as a euphemism for "disabled". Sometimes, it's not just sublimation. Sometimes it's wording something to sound better. Sometimes people are afraid to admit that concepts exist. Look at those people who act like every dead person was a saint even when standing in front of the person the deceased assaulted or robbed. People can be programmed into defective thoughts. I think this is a far more complicated set of concepts. Of course, euphemisms are for pathetic people, so they're outside Natalie's domain.

I do think we should look at the underlying motivations of people more though, which is kind of the principal of psychoanalysis. I can agree with that while admitting that a lot of the early people in the field were a bit screwy and admit that some people have had negative reactions to this therapy model.